4.5 Article

Predicting survival using clinical risk scores and non-HLA immunogenetics

Journal

BONE MARROW TRANSPLANTATION
Volume 50, Issue 11, Pages 1445-1452

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/bmt.2015.173

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Marie Curie Research Training Network (MCRTN) (European Commission) [CT-2004-512253: TRANSNET, LSHB-CT-2007-037703: Stemdiagnostics]
  2. German Research Foundation (DFG) [GRK 1034]
  3. Marie Curie Initial Training Network (MCITN) [315963: CELLEUROPE]
  4. Deutsche Jose Carreras Leukamie-Stiftung

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Previous studies of non-histocompatibility leukocyte antigen (HLA) gene single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) on subgroups of patients undergoing allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) revealed an association with transplant outcome. This study further evaluated the association of non-HLA polymorphisms with overall survival in a cohort of 762 HSCT patients using data on 26 polymorphisms in 16 non-HLA genes. When viewed in addition to an already established clinical risk score (EBMT-score), three polymorphisms: rs8177374 in the gene for MyD88-adapter-like (MAL; P = 0.026), rs9340799 in the oestrogen receptor gene (ESR; P = 0.003) and rs1800795 in interleukin-6 (IL-6; P = 0.007) were found to be associated with reduced overall survival, whereas the haplo-genotype (ACC/ACC) in IL-10 was protective (P = 0.02). The addition of these non-HLA polymorphisms in a Cox regression model alongside the EBMT-score improved discrimination between risk groups and increased the level of prediction compared with the EBMT-score alone (gain in prediction capability for EBMT-genetic-score 10.8%). Results also demonstrated how changes in clinical practice through time have altered the effects of non-HLA analysis. The study illustrates the significance of non-HLA genotyping prior to HSCT and the importance of further investigation into non-HLA gene polymorphisms in risk prediction.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available